Talk:Serbian exonyms

English name vs Local name

We have a small dispute here as to which name to use for the source language. We are of course agreed that the target language is Serbian, but I am saying that the source language has to be English and not the local language: now maybe the English exonyms page is a little badly presented because it gives the English for the foreign names whereby it would be better off giving first the English followed by how the city is known in its national language/s. A similar concept can be reflected on Serbian wikipedia, whereby Serbian names are primarily given, followed by how the towns and countries are known in their own languages, but you see, as this is English Wikipedia, it communicates to people whose language is English, in English, so an Englishman with knowledge of Germany as a country but not of the German language is no more expected to know that Köln is the local name for Cologne than a Serbian should know that Alba is the Scottish language name for its own territory. This is turn brings us to another concept, which is that if the towns should be given in the local languages, should not the countries follow the same pattern? The English speaker will find it easier to guess which country Shqipëria is by its Serbian latinic translation, for Letonija he wouldn't have a clue, and as for Magyarország being Мађарска (Mađarska), well this is nothing to the Englishman who is reading the article. Tell me honestly Travelbird, do you know which country calls itself Sakartvelo without me telling you or without you cheating and checking? I hope you see my point. Evlekis 17:56, 10 February 2007 (UTC) Евлекис Blocked sock:Evlekis.

• The point of this list (and all the other exonym lists) is to give people a reference tool when coming across alternate spellings in older literature. E.g. When I look at an old map or book of Translyvania I most likely only find Hungarian and/or German names. Now if I want to find historical information on - let's say - Baia Mare - then I need to have a reference to know what that town was called back then. So since I know it was in Hungary back then, I look up Baia Mare on the Hungarian exonym page and find Nagybánya.
• If you compare English exonyms with foreign exonyms, you will end up having no idea what the town is actually called locally today. For example if you list Cologne (Eng.) = Cologne (French) then the informational use is next to non-existant. And you will also add non-exonyms. Just because Köln is called Cologne in English doesn't mean that Turkish : Köln is an exonym, or (on the Serbian list) : Келн is not an exonym but rather just a transliteration for Köln. Travelbird 18:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • and by the way : Sakartvelo is Georgia Travelbird 18:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
    • And I might also add that reverse lists (i.e. local>foreign) might also be useful for other purposes, so feel free to add another page if you like. If you feel that the lists should be flipped, then feel free to discuss below Travelbird 18:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Well I know that Cologne and Keln are not true exonyms but simply translations, but they too form an objective of the article. I am still not in favour of having the local forms: that fact that the city which is in English called the Hague, and Хаг in Serbian, is called Den Haag in Dutch means nothing to the English/Australians who may be reading this page to see how names of towns are in Serbian. If it were Serbian they were interested in, then it doesn't matter what the local name for the town is. Looking at it from your point of view: if the article exists to compare Serbian names with the local names, then this raises a question as to whether this kind of information is required on English language wikipedia. Can you imagine a set of travel vocabulary giving translations of Basque from Swahili? And all without an indication as to what the words mean in English? Well this is what we are currently giving the English language community: The English has to be included here one way or another and there is only alternative in keeping with your sentiment, and that be that we list three names; the order is not relevant but we can have: Eng. Vienna, Ger. Wien, Serb. Беч. But then if we do this for every language's page on exonyms (baring in mind that there needs to be a universal approach to this issue), then there will hardly be a need for an English exonym page because the translations involving English are available on every exonym page (ie. explaining that Беч is Wien {as you prefer it}, which is in turn Vienna, explains that English Vienna is Austrian Wien: pointless having English exonym page). Do you follow? Evlekis 19:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC) Евлекис Blocked sock:Evlekis. Btw. Congratulations on knowing that Sakartvelo is Georgia. Now I challenge you to tell me which country is locally "Хајастан". Good luck. Evlekis 19:40, 10 February 2007 (UTC) Blocked sock:Evlekis.

I can't follow you arguement that exonyms are simple translation and thus we need to include an English version. In fact exonyms are different names for the same place, different names being used at different times. E.g. an English excyclopedia from 1910 will list "Beuthen", while one from 1960 will list Bytom. Neither Beuthen nore Bytom are English, but I still have to know that they are the same place if I (the English speaker) want to do research on the city. Given, with Beuthen/Bytom it's not that difficult, but Pozsony/Bratislava is rather impossible if you don't a) know it already, b) look it up on the list. Travelbird 20:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Btw. Hayastan is the Armenian name for Armenia. Interesing to know that Serbs use this instead of "Armenija". Travelbird 20:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Reopening this as the list is virtually useless as is. If I am looking for the Serbian name of the city I know in English as Munich, the fact that it is München in German is irrelevant to me. And could even keep someone from finding the information at all. Note that the countries are listed by English name, you don't have Finland under "Suomi" for instance. --Khajidha (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Sarajevo

...Naturally, "Saraevo" isn't a true exonym because its basis is on the local name, but there is a difference in pronunciation hence the spelling. As you may know, Slavic languages are consistent in photenics. Russian "E" alays has a slight "y" sound to precede it, for them to create the hard "e" sound, they use Cyrillic "Э". So if they write "CAPAEBO", I guess that is the Serbo-Croat equivalent. But in Bulgarian and Macedonian too, they do pronounce "e" straight after "a". So the choice is yours whether it stands as exonym. More controversial is Croatia's "Rieka". Most names in Serbian and Croatian often have "y sound" before letter "e" after vowels. Not so with Bulgarian and Macedonian. It is supposed to be photecially acknowledged but when that vowel is "j", whether or not it makes a difference sound is up to you. Italians write "Italia" and we write "Italija" but you can hardly spot the extra sound because "j" is our "short-i" and "i" is standard, the place of articulating is the same, high back vowel. But you see, it works two ways, the Bulgarian city of "Blagoevgrad" is "BlagoJevgrad" on Serbian and Croatian. After "o" it is clear different sound. I'll let you do as you choose over this one, you know about exonyms better than me I see. Balkantropolis 07:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

If the spelling and the pronounciation are diffrent then usually we have an exonym. The only exception to this being alternate spellings/pronounciation which are not exact but stive to be as accurate as possible, e.g. Минхен (Latin transcription would be Minhen, but since German ch = Serbian x and the Serbian и is closest to the non-existant "ü" in Serbian, Минхен is not an exonym but a transcription. Travelbird 20:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Travelbird"

I do see what you mean. If that's the case, we made to collectively revise a lot of these exonym pages. Evlekis 10:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC) Blocked sock:Evlekis.

inside-out

The organization of this article is strange: the ostensible subject-matter is all in parentheses!

Of course I don't think such articles have any good reason to exist; but one hates to see even foolish things done poorly. —Tamfang (talk) 07:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)